Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

chat.customEmojis.delete

Deletes a custom emoji by resource name from Google Chat, applying creator and emoji-manager permission checks.

Instructions

Deletes a custom emoji. By default, users can only delete custom emoji they created. Emoji managers assigned by the administrator can delete any custom emoji in the organization. See Learn about custom emojis in Google Chat. Custom emojis are only available for Google Workspace accounts, and the administrator must turn custom emojis on for the organization. For more information, see Learn about custom emojis in Google Chat and [Manage custom emoj [HTTP DELETE] — removes the resource; irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the post-delete resource state (or empty) as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, get, list.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes[URL path segment] Required. Resource name of the custom emoji to delete. Format: `customEmojis/{customEmoji}` You can use the emoji name as an alias for `{customEmoji}`. For exam
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Required. Resource name of the custom emoji to delete. Format: `customEmojis/{customEmoji}` You can use the emoji name as an alias for `{customEmoji}`. For exam"New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. Resource name of the custom emoji to delete. Format: `customEmojis/{customEmoji}` You can use the emoji name as an alias for `{customEmoji}`. For exam"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^customEmojis/[^/]+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose important behavior: deletion permissions, the Workspace/admin enablement precondition, irreversibility, and refusal under readonly safety profiles. The generic HTTP DELETE boilerplate is somewhat noisy and the source text appears truncated, but the key behavioral traits are present.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description contains duplicated documentation links, a visibly truncated sentence, and a long generic HTTP DELETE/body-building suffix. Useful facts are present, but the structure is noisy and not front-loaded cleanly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a deletion tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description provides enough context: permissions, organizational preconditions, irreversibility, and sibling operations. The truncation and repeated boilerplate keep it from being fully complete and polished.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the required name parameter and its format. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a custom emoji.' It also lists the sibling operations over the same resource (create, get, list), making the operation easy to distinguish.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives clear context about who can use the tool: users can normally delete only their own emoji, while administrator-assigned emoji managers can delete any organization emoji. It does not explicitly say when to prefer get/list first or when not to use deletion, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools